The peer-review process

Learned Publishing

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 247-258

  Rowland, Fytton ^a  

^a LOUGHBOROUGH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036796515     PISSN: 09531513     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1087/095315102760319206     Document Type: Review

References (60)

1. Abel, R.E. and Newlin, L.W. (eds) (2002) Scholarly Publishing: Books, Journals Publishers, and Libraries in the Twentieth Century. New York: John Wiley.
2. American Psychological Association (2002). Available at: www.apa.org/journals/guide.html#overview (checked 31 May 2002).
3. Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (1999) What Authors Want: The ALPSP Research Study on the Motivations and Concerns of Contributors to Learned Journals. Worthing, UK: ALPSP.
4. Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (2001) ALPSP/EASE Peer Review Survey October-November 2000. Available at: www.alpsp.org/peerev.pdf (checked 25 Apr. 2002).
5. Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (2002) Authors and Electronic Publishing: The ALPSP Research Study on Authors' and Readers' Views of Electronic Research Communication. Worthing, UK: ALPSP.
6. Bailey, C.W. (2002) Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography, Version 42 (announced 19 Apr. 2002). Available at: http://info.lib.uh.edu/sepb/sepb.html (checked 3 May 2002).
7. Campbell, R. (1993) The publisher's position: survival in an electronic world. In A.M. Cunningham and W. Wicks (eds), Changing Roles in Information Distribution. Philadelphia, PA: National Federation of Abstracting and Indexing Services, ch. 2.
8. Ceci, S.J. and Peters, D.P. (1984) How blind is blind review? American Psychologist, 39, 1491-4.
9. de Vries, J. (2001) Peer review: the holy cow of science. In E.H. Fredericksson (ed.), A Century of Publishing. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
10. Donovan, B. (1998) The truth about peer review. Learned Publishing, 11(3), 179-84.
11. Dworaczek, M. (2002) Subject Index to Literature on Electronic Sources of Information. Available at http://library.usask.ca/̃dworacze/SUBJIN_A.HTM (checked 27 Jun. 2002).
12. Fredericksson, E.H. (ed.) (2001) A Century of Scientific Publishing. Amsterdam: IOS Publishing.
13. Friedman, D.P. (1995) Manuscript peer review at the AJR: facts, figures and quality assessment. American Journal of Roentgenology, 164(4), 1007-9.
14. Godlee, F., Gale, C.R. and Martyn, C.N. (1998) The effect on the quality of peer review of blinding reviewers and asking them to sign their reports: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280, 237-40.
15. Godlee, F. and Jefferson, T. (1999) Peer Review in Medicine. London: BMJ Books.
16. Goldbeck-Wood, S. (1999) Evidence on peer review - scientific quality control or smokescreen? BMJ, 318, 44-5.
17. Halliday, L.L. and Oppenheim, C. (2000) Comparison and evaluation of some economic models of digital-only journals. Journal of Documentation, 56(6), 660-73.
18. Harnad, S. (1996) Implementing peer review on the Net: Scientific quality control in scholarly electronic journals. In R.P. Peek and G.B. Newby (eds), Scholarly Publishing: The Electronic Frontier. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 103-18.
19. Harnad, S. (1999) The invisible hand of peer review. Exploit Interactive, 5. Available at www.exploit-lib.org/issue5/peer-review/ (checked 25 Apr. 2002).
20. Henderson, A. (2002) In R.E. Abel and L.W. Newlin (eds), Scholarly Publishing: Books, Journals Publishers, and Libraries in the Twentieth Century. New York: John Wiley, pp. 133-61.
21. Holmes, A. (1997) Electronic publishing in science: reality check. Canadian Journal of Communication, 22(3/4), 105-116.
22. Hübler, A., Linde, P. and Smith, J.W.T (eds) (2001) Electronic Publishing '01: 2001 in the Digital Publishing Odyssey. Proceedings of an ICCC/IFIP Conference held at Canterbury, UK, 5-7 Jul. 2001. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
23. Journal of the American Medical Association (1990), 263 (themed issue).
24. Journal of the American Medical Association (1994), 272 (themed issue).
25. Journal of the American Medical Association (1998), 280 (themed issue).
26. Kochar, M.S. (1986) The peer review of manuscripts - in need of improvement. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 39 (2), 147-9.
27. Lock, S. (1985) A Difficult Balance: Editorial Peer Review in Medicine. London: Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust.
28. McKnight, C. and Price, S. (1999) A survey of author attitudes and skills in relation to article publishing in paper and electronic journals. Journal of Documentation, 55(5), 556-76.
29. Meadows, A.J. (1974) Communication in Science. London: Butterworths.
30. Meadows, A.J. (1998) Communicating Research. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
31. Okerson, A.S and McDonnell, J.J. (1995) Scholarly Journals at the Crossroads: A Subversive Proposal for Scholarly Publishing. Washington DC: Association of Research Libraries.
32. Page, G., Campbell, R. and Meadows, A.J. (1997) Journal Publishing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. Peek, R.P. and Newby, G.B. (eds) (1996) Scholarly Publishing: The Electronic Frontier. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
34. Ravetz, J.R. (1973) Scientific Knowledge and its Social Problems. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
35. Roberts, P. (1999) Scholarly publishing, peer review and the Internet. First Monday, 4(4). Available at http://firstmonday.org/issues/issues4_4/proberts/ (checked 25 Apr. 2002).
36. Rowland, F. (1982) The scientist's view of his information system. Journal of Documentation, 38(1), 38-42.
37. Rowland, F. (1996) The need for management of electronic journals. In R.P. Peek and G.B. Newby (eds), Scholarly Publishing: The Electronic Frontier. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 243-50.
38. Rowland, F. (1997) Printed journals: fit for the future?, Ariadne, 7, 6-7; fuller version available at: www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue7/fytton/ (checked 1 May 2002).
39. Rowland, F. (1999) Electronic publishing: non-commercial alternatives. Learned Publishing, 12(3), 209-17.
40. Royal Society, The (1981) A Study of the Scientific Information System of the United Kingdom. London: The Royal Society. British Library Research and Development Department Report no. 5626.
41. Royal Society, The (1993) The Scientific, Technical and Medical Information System in the UK. London: The Royal Society. British Library Research and Development Department Report no. 6123.
42. Sandewall, E. (2001) Open reviewing, closed reviewing: where's the publication? In E.H. Fredericksson (ed.), A Century of Scientific Publishing. Amsterdam: IOS Publishing, pp. 285-301.
43. Singleton, A. (1980) Learned Societies, Journals and Collaboration with Publishers. Leicester: Primary Communication Research Centre.
44. Smith, J.W.T. (1999a) The deconstructed journal a new model for academic publishing. Learned Publishing, 12(2), 79-92.
45. Smith, R. (1999b) Opening up BMJ peer review. BMJ, 318, 4-5.
46. Smith, R. (2001) Medical editor lambasts journals and editors. BMJ, 323, 651.
47. Tenopir, C. and King, D.W. (1997) Trends in scientific scholarly journal publishing in the United States. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 28(3), 135-70.
48. Tenopir, C. and King, D.W. (2000) Towards Electronic Journals: Realities for Scientists, Librarians and Publishers. Washington, DC: SLA Publishing.
49. van Rooyen, S. (1998) A critical examination of the peer review process. Learned Publishing, 11 (3), 185-91.
50. van Rooyen, S., Godlee, F., Evans, S., Black, N. and Smith, R. (1999) Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers' recommendations: a randomised trial. BMJ, 318, 23-7.
51. van Rooyen, S. (2001) The evaluation of peer review quality. Learned Publishing, 14(2), 85-91.
52. Walker,T.J. (1998) Free Internet access to traditional journals. American Scientist, 86(5). Available at www.amsci.org/amsci/articles.98articles/walker.html (checked 29 Apr. 2002).
53. Walker, T.J. (2002) The Future of Scientific Journals: Free Web Access? Paper presented at an ALPSP International Learned Journals Seminar, London, UK, 12 Apr. 2002. Available at csssrvr.entnem.ifl.edu/̃walker/epub/ALPSP.htm (checked 26 Apr. 2002). See also: Learned Publishing, 15(4), 279-84.
54. Walker, T.J. (2002) The Future of Scientific Journals: Free Web Access? Paper presented at an ALPSP International Learned Journals Seminar, London, UK, 12 Apr. 2002. Available at csssrvr.entnem.ifl.edu/∼walker/epub/ALPSP.htm (checked 26 Apr. 2002). See also: Learned Publishing, 15(4), 279-84.
55. Weller, A.C. (2000) Editorial peer review for electronic journals: current issues and emerging models. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(14), 1328-33.
56. Weller, A.C. (2001) Editorial Peer Review: Its Strengths and Weaknesses. Silver Spring, MD: American Society for Information Science and Technology.
57. Williamson, A. (2002) What Happens to Peer Review? Paper presented at an ALPSP International Learned Journals Seminar, London, UK, 12 Apr. 2002. Available at: www.alpsp.org/wil120402.ppt.
58. Wood, D.J. (1998) Peer review and the Web: the implications of electronic peer review for biomedical authors, referees and learned society publishers. Journal of Documentation, 54 (2), 173-93.
59. Woodward, A.M. (1976) Editorial Processing Centres: Scope irt the United Kingdom. London, UK: British Library Research and Development Department (BLRDD). BLRDD Report no. 5271.
60. Ziman, J. (1968) Public Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.